Classifications

• • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
  • A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
  • A01G—HORTICULTURE; CULTIVATION OF VEGETABLES, FLOWERS, RICE, FRUIT, VINES, HOPS OR SEAWEED; FORESTRY; WATERING
  • A01G7/00—Botany in general
  • A01G7/06—Treatment of growing trees or plants, e.g. for preventing decay of wood, for tingeing flowers or wood, for prolonging the life of plants
• • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
  • A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
  • A01M—CATCHING, TRAPPING OR SCARING OF ANIMALS; APPARATUS FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF NOXIOUS ANIMALS OR NOXIOUS PLANTS
  • A01M21/00—Apparatus for the destruction of unwanted vegetation, e.g. weeds
  • A01M21/04—Apparatus for destruction by steam, chemicals, burning, or electricity
  • A01M21/043—Apparatus for destruction by steam, chemicals, burning, or electricity by chemicals
• • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
  • A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
  • A01N—PRESERVATION OF BODIES OF HUMANS OR ANIMALS OR PLANTS OR PARTS THEREOF; BIOCIDES, e.g. AS DISINFECTANTS, AS PESTICIDES OR AS HERBICIDES; PEST REPELLANTS OR ATTRACTANTS; PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS
  • A01N25/00—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators, characterised by their forms, or by their non-active ingredients or by their methods of application, e.g. seed treatment or sequential application; Substances for reducing the noxious effect of the active ingredients to organisms other than pests

Definitions

• the present invention relates to an improved method for delivering an effective amount of exogenous chemical substance or substances to a plant or plants via non- woody living tissues thereof. Also part of the invention are novel compositions which are particularly adapted for use by the method of the invention, apparatus for delivering exogenous chemical substances by the method of the invention, and leaf prepared by the invention.
• the method is characterized in that it involves the use of a propelled material to cause local physical injury to non-woody living tissues before, simultaneously with or after application of the exogenous chemical substance.
• Benefits of the enhanced delivery achieved by practice of the present invention include, but are not restricted to, lower use rates, better rainfastness and more rapid manifestation of the effect of the exogenous chemical substance.
• exogenous chemical substance as defined herein is any onomeric or oligomeric chemical substance having desired biological activity, whether naturally or synthetically derived, which is applied to a plant with the intent or result of said substance entering living cells or tissues of the plant.
• exogenous chemical substances include, but are not limited to, chemical pesticides (such as herbicides, fungicides, bactericides, viricides, insecticides, miticides, nematicides, molluscicides and the like) , plant growth regulators, fertilizers and nutrients, gametocides, defoliants, desiccants, mixtures thereof and the like.
• chemical pesticides such as herbicides, fungicides, bactericides, viricides, insecticides, miticides, nematicides, molluscicides and the like
• plant growth regulators fertilizers and nutrients, gametocides, defoliants, desiccants, mixtures thereof and the like.
• Another benefit of enhanced efficiency of delivery may be an improved tendency of an applied chemical substance to retain its efficacy on a treated plant when natural or artificial rain or overhead irrigation occurs within a short period, such as a few minutes to a few hours, after application. Such a tendency is referred to herein as "rainfastness" .
• Yet another benefit of enhanced efficiency of delivery may be earlier manifestation of outward signs or symptoms that the applied substance is exerting its desired effect in or on a treated plant, on parasites or pathogens of the plant, or on organisms, particularly invertebrate animals such as insects, feeding on non-woody or woody parts of the plant.
• Japanese Patent Application No. 4-290807 published in 1992 discloses a method of controlling the woody climbing weed kudzu by wounding the stems followed by treatment of cut stems with the trimethylsulfonium or isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, or with bialaphos or the ammonium salt of glufosinate.
• the present invention provides enhanced delivery of exogenous chemical substances to non-woody or herbaceous tissue.
• the present invention seeks to eliminate the problem mentioned by Kirkby and Glenn, namely that cut plants present a reduced foliar area for uptake of an exogenous chemical substance, while still exploiting wounds or other local physical injuries as sites for enhanced delivery.
• Physical injury as practiced herein is of a type that does not result in removal of substantial bio ass from a treated plant.
• UK Patent Application No. 2,120,513 published in 1983 discloses a method and apparatus for chemically treating weeds or undesirable plants involving scraping or bruising the weed or plant and applying a chemical substance to the scraped or bruised plant.
• No data are provided demonstrating enhanced delivery or efficacy, nor is the nature of the physical injury to living tissues caused by the scraping or bruising action characterized.
• the present invention provides a method, apparatus and composition for delivering an exogenous chemical substance to plants wherein physical injury to non-woody tissues thereof is localized rather than generalized, and wherein there is no requirement for a scraping or bruising device to be dragged over the plants, making constant contact with the plants.
• Cuticle abrasion is commonly used in laboratory studies of plant growth regulators to enhance uptake into epicotyls, hypocotyls, coleoptiles or internode segments in standard bioassays. For example, G. E. Scherer in Plant Growth Regulation Vol. 11 (1992), pp.
• Cuticle composed primarily of cutin and waxes, is thought to act as an effective barrier to the penetration of many exogenously applied chemical substances. Many investigators have attempted to remove the outer wax layer of the cuticle completely to improve chemical uptake. For example, R. C. Kirkwood in "Aspects of Applied Biology 14: Studies of Pesticide Transfer and Performance" (1987) , pp. 281-291 reported removal of cuticle waxes from bracken fronds by swabbing with chloroform-impregnated cotton wool. Kirkwood reported that this treatment significantly enhanced uptake of the herbicide asulam into the fronds. Similarly, E. A. Baker in the same publication, pp.
• US Patent No. 5,179,022 describes an apparatus for delivering substances " in a non-lethal manner" into living cells and tissues by the method more broadly disclosed in US Patent No. 4,945,050. It has not previously been anticipated or envisioned that local physical injury to living tissues would be highly effective as a way of improving delivery of exogenous chemical substances into plants.
• An improved method for delivering an effective amount of an exogenous chemical substance to non-woody living tissue of a plant comprises the steps of (a) causing an effective degree of local physical injury, involving death or significant damage to individual cells in said tissue at one or more sites therein or thereon, by means of material propelled from a device; and (b) applying said exogenous chemical substance to the plant at or close to at least one of the sites of said injury. It is important that step (b) is accomplished within an efficacious time period of step (a) and that said injury per se does not result in substantial removal of biomass from the plant nor exacerbate any condition of the plant sought to be remedied by said exogenous chemical substance.
• the propelled material causing the local physical injury required in practicing the present invention may consist illustratively of discrete particles or a continuous or semi-continuous stream.
• the injury may result from purely mechanical forces such as those involved in impact or abrasion by the propelled material.
• Another way in which the propelled material may provide the required injury is by being delivered at a temperature inimical to living plant tissues.
• Yet another way in which the propelled material may provide the required injury is by the presence therein of a substance chemically corrosive to plant tissues. More than one of these mechanisms of injury may occur. Other mechanisms of injury may be involved without departing from the spirit or scope of the present invention.
• steps (a) and (b) are accomplished very close together in time.
• the present invention also provides apparatus that can be used, in a single pass over plants to be treated, to propel material so as to cause the required local physical injury, and also to apply the exogenous chemical substance to the plant.
• steps (a) and (b) are accomplished simultaneously and the exogenous chemical substance is contained in or on the propelled material used to cause the required local physical injury.
• the present invention provides apparatus that can be used for simultaneously inflicting the required injury and applying the exogenous chemical substance by propelling material containing the exogenous chemical substance.
• the present invention also provides a composition comprising both an agent of physical injury as defined herein and an exogenous chemical substance.
• a further objective of the present invention is to improve the rainfastness of an exogenously applied chemical substance, that is, the tendency of the substance to retain its efficacy on a treated plant when natural or artificial rain or overhead irrigation occurs within a short period, such as a few minutes to a few hours, after application.
• a still further objective of the present invention is to expedite the manifestation of symptoms of the desired effect of an exogenous chemical substance applied to a plant.
• a yet further objective of the present invention is to provide compositions comprising an exogenous chemical substance, which, when used in accordance with the invention, have any or all of the advantages just mentioned over heretofore used compositions.
• FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of an apparatus of one embodiment of the invention for chemically treating non-woody living tissue of a plant.
• Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of an apparatus of another embodiment of the invention.
• This invention provides an improved method of delivering an exogenous chemical substance to non-woody living tissue of a plant, whereby said substance is applied simultaneously or sequentially with local physical injury inflicted on the tissue of sufficient severity to kill or significantly damage individual cells.
• local wounding or other physical injury of the kinds achieved by practicing this invention facilitates uptake and transport of an exogenously applied chemical substance by partially or wholly overcoming critical barriers not only in the cuticle and cell walls, but also in the membranes separating non-living (apoplastic) from living (symplastic) parts of the tissue. Mechanisms other than physical barrier removal may be involved.
• the inventors were surprised, in light of the literature cited herein, to discover that such injury, involving death or at least significant damage to individual cells, could enhance, in some cases very markedly, the efficiency of delivery of a wide variety of exogenous chemicals.
• An essential feature of the invention is that injury is caused not by blades, rollers, abrasive surfaces or similar means attached to a device, but instead by material propelled from a device wherein it is the material rather than the device that causes the injury. Indeed in preferred embodiments the device itself does not contact the plant or plants being treated.
• propelled material allows the injury to non-woody tissue to be localized so that the tissue as a whole is not seriously damaged or killed, but rather the injury is confined to a single site or more typically a plurality of sites in or on otherwise undamaged tissue. Without being bound by theory, it is believed likely that the maintenance of healthy tissue around the sites of injury is important for the onward transport of the exogenous chemical substance after uptake.
• exogenous chemical substance means any chemical substance, whether naturally or synthetically derived, which is applied to a plant with the intent or result of said substance entering living cells or tissues of the plant.
• exogenous chemical substances include, but are not limited to, chemical pesticides (such as herbicides, algicides, fungicides, bactericides, viricides, insecticides, aphicides, iticides, nematicides, molluscicides and the like) , plant growth regulators, fertilizers and nutrients, gametocides, defoliants, desiccants, mixtures thereof and the like.
• Delivery of an exogenous chemical substance means causing it to enter non-woody living tissue of a plant in such a way that the desired effect of said substance on the plant, on plant pathogens, on plant parasites or on invertebrate animal pests feeding on the plant, can be obtained. In many cases this requires onward transport of the exogenous chemical substance from its locus of uptake.
• the term "local physical injury” means injury confined to one or more restricted loci in or on non-woody living tissue of a plant, said injury resulting from a direct mechanical or chemical effect including but not restricted to impact, abrasion, puncture, freezing, dehydration or corrosion, but excluding indirectly induced effects in the tissue and excluding functional impairment of cell membranes not accompanied by physical breaching of said membranes, whether such impairment is caused directly or indirectly by the agency of injury.
• Local physical injury as disclosed herein preferably does not per se (that is, in the absence of any treatment other than by the agency of said injury, and in particular in the absence of an exogenously applied chemical substance) do significant lasting damage to plants.
• the time period during which any such damage persists is not critical, but illustratively may be in the range from about 3 days to about 3 months. -16- although greater or lesser periods may be suitable.
• Such injury is described herein as "temporary" . Indeed plants receiving such injury per se show no noticeable long-lasting differences in growth, stature or phenotype from uninjured plants, though some scarring may persist.
• the target plant is a desirable plant such as for example a crop, turfgrass or ornamental
• the exogenous chemical substance being applied is for the purpose of improving the growth or appearance of the plant or protecting it from attack by a pest or pathogen
• the short-term nature of the injury prescribed herein is not detrimental.
• the plant being treated is an undesirable plant such as for example a weed
• the exogenous chemical substance being applied is for example a herbicide
• the lack of lasting damage caused by the injury per se is advantageous.
• prior art methods involving physiological as opposed to physical injury to cell membranes tend to give lasting effects which may inhibit transport or performance of the herbicide.
• a good example is the use of a diphenylether herbicide such as acifluorfen as a co-treatment with a systemic herbicide such as glyphosate, wherein the rapid membrane-damaging effect of the diphenylether gives early symptoms of herbicidal activity but antagonizes the longer-term efficacy of the systemic herbicide.
• propelled material to cause local physical injury to plants which are previously or subsequently cut, pruned, mown or shredded in a separate operation is within the scope of the invention if an exogenous chemical substance is applied within an efficacious time period of said use of propelled material. Indeed it will sometimes increase the practicality of the method if plants have been cut, pruned, mown or otherwise have substantial amount of biomass removed before treatment according to the invention.
• an effective degree of physical injury for the purposes of the present invention is one that results in delivery of an effective amount of an exogenous chemical substance when applied in accordance with the invention; usually but not restrictively it is a degree of injury that exposes both apoplast and symplast of non-woody tissue.
• Evidence that membrane barriers have been breached, so that both apoplast and symplast are exposed, is provided by a substantial increase in efflux of cell contents that may be observed after inflicting injury with propelled material.
• This efflux may be evident by organoleptic detection such as for example a wet or slick appearance on the surface of treated plant parts or by release of volatile substances having a detectable odor; in the laboratory efflux can be measured by assaying the electrolyte or protein content of an aqueous wash from the surface of treated parts, using a standard conductivity meter or commercially available protein assay method.
• organoleptic detection such as for example a wet or slick appearance on the surface of treated plant parts or by release of volatile substances having a detectable odor
• efflux can be measured by assaying the electrolyte or protein content of an aqueous wash from the surface of treated parts, using a standard conductivity meter or commercially available protein assay method.
• Another technique for detecting cell rupture involves the use of known stains such as Evans blue applied to treated areas. It is desirable, and preferred, to use a propelled material treatment that provides a plurality of small injuries.
• non-woody as applied to plant tissues or parts relates to leaves (including laminas, petioles, stipules, ochreas and sheaths) , herbaceous stems and other above-ground organs not having a great degree of lignified secondary tissue development.
• the tissues targeted by the present invention are those covered by a cuticularized epidermis as opposed to a secondary phelloderm. Most commonly the tissues treated are located in leaves.
• exogenous chemical substance must take place within an efficacious time period of inflicting injury by propelled material.
• These two essential steps of the method of the invention can occur in either order or simultaneously. It is preferred but not critical that application of the exogenous chemical substance be accomplished not more than about 5 days before and not more than about 5 days after the injury treatment. It is more preferred that if chemical application precedes the injury treatment the time period between the two steps is not more than about 2 days. In even more preferred embodiments of the invention, the two steps are accomplished simultaneously or almost simultaneously.
• both steps can be performed in a single pass over plants to be treated, (2) the means of accomplishing both steps can, if desired, be provided on the same apparatus, and (3) the exogenous chemical substance can, if desired, be contained in or on the propelled material or can itself comprise the propelled material causing the injury.
• the propelled material is ejected from a suitable propelling device and may illustratively take any of a number of forms. The form of the propelled material to a great extent dictates the nature and design of the device which ejects it.
• the propelled material may, for example, comprise discrete solid or liquid particles, or a continuous or semi-continuous liquid stream.
• a preferred particulate material is a solid abrasive. In some cases it may be possible to prepare the exogenous chemical substance itself as a solid particulate abrasive, and accomplish both steps of the method in a single operation. When a solid particulate abrasive is used, it may be ejected from the propelling device in a gaseous or liquid medium.
• a preferred gaseous medium is air, but nitrogen or carbon dioxide or gaseous mixtures may be useful alternatives.
• Acceleration of abrasive particles in such a medium may be achieved by application of force or pressure imparting energy to a mass of such particles, as for example in a sandblaster or nutblaster.
• a preferred liquid medium is water, in which the solid abrasive particles are suspended and wherein, if desired, the exogenous chemical is formulated.
• a high-pressure water jet device or liquid hone may illustratively provide the required energy and power.
• a water jet device is operated at a pressure in excess of about 250 lb/sq inch (1727 kiloPascals) , preferably in excess of about 500 lb/sq inch (3445 kiloPascals) using a nozzle orifice diameter of about 0.002 inch (0.051 mm) to about 0.012 inch (0.30 mm) giving an application pattern in the range of 0-10 degrees, preferably 0-5 degrees.
• Preferred ranges for high-pressure water jet use according to the invention are energy flux index of about 0.004 BTU/sq inch (0.65 joules/cm 2 ) to about 0.01 BTU/sq inch (1.6 joule/cm 2 ) and power flux index of about 5000 (8.2 joules/hr/cm 2 ) to about 40000 BTU/hour/sq inch (6.5 x 106 joules/cm 2 ) at the point of contact with the tissue, although those skilled in the art will appreciate that lesser or greater indices may be appropriate if desired.
• the liquid may, if desired, also contain a suspended solid particulate abrasive.
• Combinations of physical variables can be selected to apply the appropriate amount and rate of energy per unit area to achieve the desired degree of injury.
• These variables include mass flow, distance from the propelling device to the plant surface, force or pressure, collimation or dispersion of liquid, density and rheology of liquid, particle character and morphology including size, shape, angularity, hardness and density, and spray geometry and attitude.
• Illustrative non-limiting examples of solid abrasive particles useful in practicing the present invention include those composed of any geological mineral, for example clay (such as kaolin) , silica, quartz, garnet, alumina, barytes, carborundum or metal oxides, carbonates, sulfates or phosphates; any silicious or calcareous life form, for example diatoms; man-made resins; glasses; microcapsules; coated or uncoated crystals, including any solid form of the exogenous chemical substance or of a known adjuvant or inert formulation ingredient (such as ammonium sulfate) ; or plant-derived materials, for example ground walnut shells.
• An abrasive as used herein includes any material that provides the local physical injury prescribed herein. A mixture of different abrasives may be found advantageous in particular situations.
• Abrasive particles may be of any convenient size, but are typically in the range from about 10 ⁇ m to about 5 mm in diameter.
• the amount of abrasive used per unit area is not believed to be critical, so long as an apparatus is available or can be designed that is capable of depositing that amount.
• the amount used will likely be in the range from about 0.1 lb/acre (0.11 kg/ha) to about 1000 lb/acre (1120 kg/ha), more probably in the range from about 1 lb/acre (1.12 kg/ha) to about 600 lb/acre (672 kg/ha) , for example in the range from about 25 lb/acre (28 kg/ha) to about 300 lb/acre (336 kg/ha) .
• inimical herein is meant a temperature outside the range permitting survival of non-woody tissue of a plant when experienced by said tissue for a very brief period such as a few seconds.
• the inimical temperature of the propelled material is such as to cause local freezing injury to the tissue.
• Freezing injury in this case is acute physical injury caused by sudden exposure to an inimically low temperature; it includes but is not restricted to effects such as formation of intracellular or intercellular ice crystals, local dehydration or combinations thereof.
• the propelled material may for example comprise frozen water in any physical form, including ice crystals.
• the propelled material comprises carbon dioxide in its solid phase. As solid carbon dioxide sublimes on a plant surface it draws both the heat of sublimation and sensible heat from the surrounding tissue, creating the desired freezing injury.
• Solid carbon dioxide crystals may be accelerated in the propelling device to provide a combination of impact or abrasion injury and freezing injury; alternatively they may be ejected from the propelling device with little force and allowed to fall on the plant surface as carbon dioxide "snow" primarily under the influence of gravity.
• the exogenous chemical substance may optionally be mixed or formulated with the propelled material.
• the propelled material comprises a chemical substance corrosive to non-woody living tissue of a plant.
• corrosion involves the chemical disassembly of lipids and polymers so as to damage or destroy mechanical support and integrity of the tissue.
• a preferred corrosive agent is an aqueous solution of a strong alkali, for example an alkali or alkaline earth metal hydroxide or ammonia.
• the corrosive agent may be applied by conventional spraying in a separate or preferably the same spray solution as contains the exogenous chemical substance.
• Exogenous chemical substances which can usefully be applied by the method of the present invention are normally, but not exclusively, those which are expected to have a beneficial effect on the overall growth or yield of desired plants such as crops, or a deleterious or lethal effect on the growth of undesirable plants such as weeds.
• Preferred substances are pesticides, plant growth regulators and gametocides.
• Particularly preferred substances are herbicides, especially those that are normally applied post-emergence to the foliage of unwanted vegetation, though the method may be effective even with herbicides that normally require pre-emergence application.
• Herbicides which may be applied by the method of the present invention include but are not limited to any listed in standard reference works such as the Herbicide Handbook, Weed Science Society of America, 7th edition (1994) . Illustratively they include asulam, bentazon, bialaphos, bipyridyls such as paraquat, bromacil, cyclohexenones such as sethoxydim, dicamba, diphenylethers such as acifluorfen, fomesafen and oxyfluorfen, fosamine, flupoxam, glufosinate, glyphosate, hydroxybenzonitriles such as bromoxynil, imidazolinones such as i azethapyr, isoxaben, phenoxies such as 2,4-D, phenoxypropionates such as quizalofop, picloram, substituted ureas such as fluometuron, sulfonylureas such as
• Herbicidally active derivatives of any known herbicide are also within the scope of the present invention if applied by the method herein described.
• a herbicidally active derivative is any compound which is a minor structural modification, most commonly but not restrictively a salt or ester, of a known herbicide, said compound retaining the essential activity of the parent herbicide though not necessarily having a potency equal to that of the parent herbicide.
• said compound converts to the parent herbicide before or after it enters the treated plant. Mixtures or coformulations of a herbicide with other ingredients, or of more than one herbicide, are likewise within the present scope.
• An especially preferred herbicide for use by the method of the present invention is glyphosate (N- phosphonomethylglycine) , a salt or ester thereof, or a compound which is converted to glyphosate in plant tissues or which otherwise provides glyphosate ion.
• glyphosate and its salts useful herein are disclosed in US Patent No. 3,799,758.
• Glyphosate salts that can be used according to this invention include but are not restricted to alkali metal, for example sodium and potassium, salts; ammonium salt; alkylamine, for example dimethylamine and isopropylamine, salts; alkylsulfonium, for example trimethylsulfonium, salt; mixtures thereof and the like.
• an effective rate must be applied, usually expressed as amount of substance per unit area treated. What constitutes a "useful degree" is to some extent arbitrary. For example, in the case of a herbicide, the amount per unit area giving, say, 80% control of a plant species as measured by growth reduction or mortality could illustratively be defined as the effective rate. It is a major benefit of the method of the present invention that the effective rate of the exogenous chemical substance is generally lower, in many cases substantially lower, than when the same substance is applied in the absence of injury by propelled material.
• Another embodiment of the present invention is apparatus for accomplishing, in a single pass over plants to be treated, both essential steps of the method. Illustrative examples of such apparatus are shown schematically in Figures l and 2 hereof and described below.
• Apparatus as provided herein comprises (a) a means for propelling material which on impact or contact with non-woody living tissue of a plant causes an effective degree of local physical injury, involving death or significant damage to individual cells at one or more sites in said tissue; and (b) a means for applying an exogenous chemical substance to the plant at or close to at least one of the sites of said injury; wherein means (a) and (b) are so arranged that application of the chemical substance is accomplished before, simultaneously with or after the propelled material impacts or contacts the tissue. It is emphasized that means (a) and (b) may be one and the same device, or they may be alike but separate, or they may be different. Said injury per se does not result in substantial removal of biomass from the plant, nor should it exacerbate any condition of the plant sought to be remedied by said exogenous chemical substance.
• the apparatus may further comprise (c) a means for raising or lowering the temperature of the propelled material to an inimical temperature as defined herein, at or prior to the time of its ejection from the propelling means.
• the apparatus l consisting of one or integral multiple parts has a means for locomotion, or is attachable to a means for locomotion (not shown) , which permits movement of the apparatus over a plant or plants to be treated 2.
• a propelling or accelerating means 3 is an element of the apparatus 1 such that material 4 ejected from the propelling means 3 is directed towards the plant or plants 2 via a dispersing and targeting means 5, also an element of apparatus 1.
• a reservoir 6 for the material 4 to be ejected is an element of apparatus l and is connected by conduit 7 to the propelling means 3.
• Exogenous chemical application means 8 is an element of the apparatus 1 in a position juxtaposed to propelling means 3 such that exogenous chemical substance 9 emitted from the exogenous chemical application means 8 via a dispersing and targeting means 10, also an element of apparatus 1, is deposited on the plant or plants 2 before or after the propelled material 4 contacts the plant or plants 2. It is understood that the deposition of material 4 and chemical substance 9 can be nearly simultaneous or be slightly displaced in time.
• the relative position of propelling means 3 and chemical application means 8 is such that they move in tandem to one another.
• a reservoir 11, an element of apparatus 1, for the material 9 to be emitted is connected by conduit 12 to the exogenous chemical application means 8.
• propelling means 3 can be any conventional device, such as for example a sandblaster or a modified form thereof, designed to accelerate said particles according to the method of this invention, whereby the particles are dispersed and targeted by a means 5 toward the plant or plants 2.
• propelled material 4 may be a fluid, for example primarily water, in which case propelling means 3 can be any conventional device, such as for example, a high-pressure water jet device or any of a number of similarly functioning devices for accelerating water or other fluids where the fluid stream is constricted and forced through a narrow aperture or nozzle means 5 which emits the fluid in a continuous or semi-continuous stream or series of droplets toward the plant or plants to be treated 2.
• propelling means 3 can be any conventional device, such as for example, a high-pressure water jet device or any of a number of similarly functioning devices for accelerating water or other fluids where the fluid stream is constricted and forced through a narrow aperture or nozzle means 5 which emits the fluid in a continuous or semi-continuous stream or series of droplets toward the plant or plants to be treated 2.
• propelling means 3 is not necessarily of a design that significantly accelerates material 4.
• Exogenous chemical application means 8 can be any conventional device for applying chemicals to plants, such as for example a hydraulic, air-assisted or rotating disk sprayer, a ropewick applicator, carpeted roller or the like.
• Apparatus 1 may be designed with the appropriate adjustable valves, metering devices, gauges and controls to precisely deliver selected amounts, either predetermined or optionally, continuously varied during treatment, for either the abrasive material or the exogenous chemical or both, on demand at a determinable speed and rate of application in a desired direction. If desired a plurality of apparatus 1 may be employed in a variety of configurations. With reference now to Figure 2 which is a nonlimiting illustration, it is noted that the apparatus
• a propelling or accelerating means 17 is an element of the apparatus 16 such that material 18 ejected from the propelling means
• a reservoir 20 for an abrasive substance is an element of apparatus 16 and is connected by conduit 21 to a mixing means 22, another element of apparatus 16.
• a reservoir 23 containing an exogenous chemical substance is an element of apparatus 16 and is connected by conduit 24 to the mixing means 22.
• the mixing means 22, which is appropriately juxtaposed to the propelling means 17 by a conduit or portal 25, allows mixing of the abrasive agent and exogenous chemical immediately prior to or during the action of the propelling means 17 as desired by the methods described in this invention.
• the mixing means 22 can mix solid particulate forms of the abrasive material with a liquid form of the exogenous chemical substance or vice versa when the material 18 ejected is applied in fluid form as for example by a conventional high pressure water jet or similar device operating at sufficiently high power to invoke the method described in this invention.
• the mixing means 22 can mix solid particulate forms of each substance, which may simultaneously require grinding or shaving of either or both materials for adequate mixing when the material 18 ejected is applied as a dry particulate, as for example by a common sandblaster or similar device.
• the mixing chamber 22 can be designed to combine liquid forms of abrasive material or exogenous chemical substance or either as a solid alone with the other as a liquid, which can then be formed into a solid particulate for example by freezing or evaporative drying and then delivered by the propelling means 17 as a solid particulate via the dispersing and targeting means 19 to the plant or plants 2.
• Apparatus 16 may be designed with the necessary adjustable valves, metering devices, gauges and controls to precisely deliver known amounts or predetermined amounts or continuously changing ratios of either the abrasive material and/or the exogenous chemical, on demand at a determinable speed and rate of application in a desired direction. If desired a plurality of apparatus l may be employed in a variety of configurations.
• a still further embodiment of the present invention is a composition which supplies both the exogenous chemical substance and the agency of local physical injury.
• the composition may illustratively comprise one or more of the following agencies of injury in sufficient amount to have the desired injurious effect: a solid particulate abrasive as described more fully above; a chemical corrosive, more particularly an alkali such as an alkali or alkaline earth metal hydroxide or ammonia; or pressurized liquid carbon dioxide.
• Seeds of species to be treated in these Examples illustrative of the invention were planted in 3-inch (7.6 cm) or 4-inch (10.1 cm) square pots filled with a steam-sterilized soil mix containing a small amount of fertilizer.
• the soil mix consisted of either 50% Metromix 350 plus 50% silt loam to which 100 g/cu ft (3.57 kg/m 3 ) Osmocote fertilizer were added, and the seeds were covered with the same soil mix without added fertilizer.
• the soil mix consisted of 100% silt loam to which 35 g/cu ft (1.25 kg/m 3 ) IBDU fertilizer were added, and the seeds were covered with a mix of 50% Rediearth plus 50% silt loam without added fertilizer.
• the pots were placed in a greenhouse or growth chamber with sub-irrigation, and emerging seedlings were thinned as needed, usually to 2 plants per pot.
• plants were treated postemergence according to a method of the invention 10 to 20 days after planting, depending on species. If rooting appeared to be a problem (usually this was confined to grass species) , light overhead watering was provided until emergence in order to encourage better root growth.
• Perennial grasses were propagated in the same manner, except that they were allowed to develop rhizomes, and were trimmed back regularly to approximately 1.5-2 inches (3.8-5.0 cm) in height using hand-held electric clippers. They were then treated postemergence according to a method of the invention more than 1 month after planting.
• Example 8 bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon, CYNDA)
• Example 9 guineagrass (Panicum maximum, PANMA)
• Greenhouse and growth chamber temperature settings for all species except SASKR were 85 * F (29 * C) day, 70'F (21'C) night, with a 14-14.5 h photoperiod, while for SASKR temperature settings were 65"F (18 * C) day, 50"F (10"C) night, with a 14-14.5 h photoperiod. The same settings were maintained before and after treatment.
• Plants were then assigned to different herbicide and rain treatments in a factorial experimental design with generally 3 replications. Abraded and unabraded plants for each treatment were sprayed at the same time using a track sprayer calibrated to deliver 20 gallons per acre (187 liters/hectare) water with an 8002E nozzle having a 50-mesh screen, 16 inches (41 cms) above the plant canopy.
• the herbicide used was glyphosate as its isopropylamine salt, in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation MON 2139 of Monsanto Company. Spray solutions were made from stock solutions prepared by dilution of MON 2139 in water.
• the abbreviation "a.e.” herein means acid equivalent.
• pots were then divided in such a manner that the plants that were to receive "rain” (overhead irrigation) were placed in a separate area from those receiving no "rain". Within each area, pots forming the first replicate were placed in one block in order of the treatment list for ease of viewing and the remaining replicates were randomly placed in separate blocks. To simulate rain, plants were given approximately 0.125 inch (0.32 cm) of overhead irrigation with an automatic irrigation system, usually within 1 hour after herbicide application.
• the plants to receive "rain” were temporarily placed in a greenhouse and given approximately 0.125 inch (0.32 cm) of overhead irrigation with the automatic irrigation system, usually within l hour after herbicide application.
• the first replicate was placed in one block in order of the treatment list for ease of viewing and the remaining replicates were randomly placed in separate blocks in the growth chamber.
• Example 1 percent control of ABUTH 12 days after glyphosate application
• Example 2 percent control of XANST 15 days after glyphosate application
• Example 3 percent control of ECHCG 15 days after glyphosate application
• Example 4 percent control of CASOB 13 days after glyphosate application
• Example 5 percent control of SEBEX 14 days after glyphosate application
• Example 6 percent control of KCHSC 16 days after glyphosate application -34- glyphosate rate i no rain rain
• Example 7 percent control of SASKR 18 days after glyphosate application
• Example 8 percent control of CYNDA 15 days after glyphosate application
• Example 9 percent control of PANMA 15 days after glyphosate application
• the herbicide used in this Example was glyphosate as its isopropylamine salt, applied as a granular composition prepared by the following procedure.
• a 10% weight/weight glyphosate a.e. solution was prepared by first diluting 13 g of a 62.7% solution of the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate with 47 g of water.
• To a 1-gallon (3.8 liter) bottle was added 340 g of amorphous silica (HiSil 233) .
• This bottle was placed on a roller mill and the 10% glyphosate a.e. solution was added with a syringe. The material was tumbled until it appeared homogeneous. This produced a powder containing 1.5% weight/weight glyphosate a.e. A 0.75% weight/weight glyphosate a.e.powder was made by mixing 200 g of the 1.5% a.e. powder with 200 g of HiSil 233.
• One set of plants that received the granular treatments was then given a light "rain” treatment by placing pots in a spray tower calibrated to deliver 20 gallons/acre (187 liters/hectare) water with an 8002E nozzle having a 50-mesh screen, 16 inches (41 cm) above the plant canopy. All plants were then placed in the greenhouse for the remainder of the experiment, and sub- irrigated. The first replicate was placed in one block in order of the treatment list for ease of viewing and the remaining replicates were randomly placed in two separate blocks.
• Example 10 percent control of ABUTH 14 days after glyphosate application
• Examples ⁇ ; -12 In these Examples illustrative of the invention, velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) seeds were planted in 4-inch (10.1 cm) square pots containing 100% silt loam soil to which 35 grams/cu ft (1.25 kg/m 3 ) IBDU fertilizer was added, and covered with a mix of 50% Rediearth plus 50% silt loam. The pots were sub- irrigated and the seedlings thinned after emergence to 2 plants per pot. The plants were grown in a greenhouse with temperature settings of 85"F (29 * C) day, 70 * F (21'C) night, with a 14-14.5 h photoperiod.
• ABUTH Abutilon theophrasti
• Abrasion was applied using propelled 200-mesh garnet exactly as described for Examples 1-9.
• the herbicide used in these Examples was glyphosate as its isopropylamine salt, applied as diluted MON 2139, exactly as described for Examples 1-9.
• the time period between abrasion and herbicide application was varied as follows. In Example 11, all abrasion treatments were applied within a short period of time, and herbicide applications were made 24, 4 and 2 hours before abrasion, at the time of abrasion (in practice abrasion occurred immediately before herbicide application) and 2, 4 and 24 hours after abrasion. A set of abraded plants received no herbicide at any time.
• herbicide applications were made to unabraded plants at two times: (i) at the time of abrasion, and (ii) 24 hours after the time of abrasion.
• all herbicide applications were made within a short period of time, and abrasion was applied 5, 2 and 1 days before herbicide application, at the time of herbicide application (in practice abrasion occurred immediately before herbicide application) , and 1, 2 and 5 days after herbicide application.
• herbicide application was made to unabraded plants.
• Example 11 percent control of ABUTH 14 days after glyphosate application
• Example 12 percent control of ABUTH 12 days after glyphosate application
• Example illustrative of the invention a 0 field test was conducted to confirm the practical efficacy of the method disclosed.
• a solid stand of FS- 435 winter wheat (TRZAW) was planted on a farm in west central Illinois approximately 1 month prior to treatment at a seeding rate of 90 lb/acre (101 kg/ha) .
• TRZAW winter wheat
• a split-plot experimental design was used, including 3 replicates.
• Herbicide treatments were applied to main plots; one section within each plot received an abrasion treatment as described below and the remainder of the plot was not abraded.
• Abrasion was 0 performed using a hand-held Sears Craftsman* sandblaster as used in Examples 1-9, the air source for which was an air compressor set at 120 lb/sq inch (827 kiloPascals) .
• the pressure dropped to approximately 110 lb/sq in (758 kiloPascals) .
• the sandblaster nozzle was held 20 inches (51 cm) above the TRZAW canopy.
• a 2 ft x 6 ft (61 cm x 183 cm) box, 20 inches (51 cm) high having no top or bottom was set in the portion of the plot which was to be abraded, and 4 passes of the sandblaster, each covering at least a 4- inch (10-cm) width, were made longitudinally in about 4 seconds for each pass.
• the box was then moved adjacent to the first abraded area, and abrasion of a second area within the plot occurred exactly as described above. Sections of all of the plots were abraded before spray treatments began, with the whole abrasion process taking 2 hours, 10 minutes.
• a backpack plot sprayer pressurized with C0 2 was used to apply the herbicide treatments.
• the total sprayed area of each plot was 6.7 ft x 20 ft (2.0 meters x 6.6 meters), with an abraded area of 2 ft x 12 ft (0.6 meter x 3.6 meters).
• a boom having four 11001 tapered flat-fan nozzles with 50-mesh screens was used to deliver 10 gallons/acre (94 liters/hectare) of spray solution, at 32 lb/sq inch (220 kiloPascals) , traveling at approximately 3 miles/hr (4.9 kilometers/h) .
• weed species were sprayed including buttercup (Ranunculus sp.
• Herbicides tested in this Example were glyphosate as its isopropylamine salt, in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation MON 2139 of Monsanto Company; glufosinate as its ammonium salt, in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation sold under the name of Basta by AgrEvo; and paraquat as its dichloride salt, in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation sold under the name of Gramoxone Super by Zeneca.
• the herbicides were pre-measured and added to the water volume using a triple-rinse procedure. Eighteen days after treatment, visual evaluation was performed to estimate herbicidal efficacy as percent control of each species in treated plots compared to untreated check plots. Average percent control was computed for each treatment and is presented in the Table below.
• Example 13 percent control of three species 18 days after herbicide application
• herbicide TRZAS RANSS LEPSS rate (kg a.e. not not not or a.i./ha) abr. abr. abr. abr. abr. no herbicide 10 glyphosate
• Seeds of weed species to be treated in these Examples illustrative of the invention were planted in 3-inch (7.6 cm) or 4-inch (10.1 cm) square pots filled with a steam-sterilized soil mix containing a small amount of fertilizer.
• the soil mix consisted of either 50% Metromix 350 plus 50% silt loam to which 100 g/cu ft (3.57 kg/m 3 ) Osmocote fertilizer were added, and the seeds were covered with the same soil mix without added fertilizer.
• the soil mix consisted of 100% silt loam to which 35 g/cu ft (1.25 kg/m 3 ) IBDU fertilizer were added, and the seeds were covered with a mix of 50% Rediearth plus 50% silt loam without added fertilizer.
• the pots were placed in a greenhouse with sub-irrigation, and emerging seedlings were thinned as needed, usually to 2 plants per pot.
• plants were treated postemergence according to a method of the invention 10 to 20 days after planting, depending on species. If rooting appeared to be a problem (usually this was confined to grass species) , light overhead watering was provided until emergence in order to encourage better root growth.
• the species tested in this Example were velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and wild proso millet (Panicum miliaceum, PANMI) .
• Greenhouse temperature settings were 85 * F (29"C) day, 70'F (21 * C) night, with a 14-14.5 h photoperiod. The same settings were maintained before and after treatment.
• the herbicides used were bentazon as technical product; atrazine technical product; bromacil as technical product ; imazethapyr as its ammonium salt, in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation sold under the name of Pursuit by American Cyanamid; and glyphosate in its acid form as technical product.
• a stock solution in a 1:1 water/acetone mixture was prepared and dilutions performed with the same mixture to provide the various rates applied.
• Glyphosate acid was dissolved at a concentration of 33 mg/ml in 5 mM potassium dihydrogen phosphate (KH 2 P0 4 ) , pH 6, and dilutions performed with deionized water to provide the various rates applied.
• Spray solutions of imazethapyr were made from stock solutions prepared by dilution of the herbicide in water. All treatments received 0.2 ml of a 10% solution of R-ll Spreader-Activator of Wilbur Ellis Company in a total spray volume of 14 ml. After spraying, pots were returned to the greenhouse. Pots forming the first replicate were placed in one block in order of the treatment list for ease of viewing and the remaining replicates were randomly placed in separate blocks. After an interval of 14 days, a visual evaluation was performed to estimate herbicidal efficacy as percent control of treated plants compared to untreated check plants. Average percent control was computed for each treatment and is presented in the Table below.
• Example 14 percent control of two species 14 days after herbicide application
• herbicide rate (kg a.e. ABUTH PANMI or a.i./ha) unabraded abraded unabraded abraded no herbicide 0 0 0 12 bentazon
• Example 15 Seeds of weed species to be treated in this Example illustrative of the invention were planted, one species per pot, in 4-inch (10.1 cm) square pots filled with steam-sterilized Dupo silt loam soil containing a small amount of 18-5-10 NPK fertilizer, and covered with the same soil with no added fertilizer. The pots were placed in a greenhouse with sub-irrigation and overhead irrigation as needed. Seedlings were thinned at cotyledon stage to 2-4 plants per pot. The species used in this study were velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) and wild proso millet (Panicum miliaceum, PANMI) .
• ABUTH Abutilon theophrasti
• PANMI wild proso millet
• the herbicide used in this Example was dicamba as its dimethylamine salt in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation Banvel-D of Sandoz.
• Banvel-D of Sandoz A stock solution in a 1:1 water/acetone mixture was prepared and dilutions performed with the same mixture to provide the various rates applied. All treatments received 0.2 ml of a 10% solution of R-ll Spreader-Activator of Wilbur Ellis Company in a total spray volume of 14 ml.
• Example 15 percent control of two species 8 days after dicamba application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was sethoxydim in the form of technical product.
• Example 16 percent control of two species 8 days after sethoxydim application rate ABUTH PANMI
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was fluometuron in the form of technical product.
• Example 17 percent control of two species 8 days after fluometuron application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was imazethapyr as its ammonium salt, in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation Pursuit of American Cyanamid.
• Example 18 percent control of two species 8 days after imazethapyr application rate ABUTH PANMI
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was picloram as its potassium salt in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation sold under the name Tordon by DowElanco, and the species used were redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE) and crabgrass (Digitaria sp. , DIGSS) , which were planted in separate rows within the same pots.
• the herbicide used was picloram as its potassium salt in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation sold under the name Tordon by DowElanco, and the species used were redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE) and crabgrass (Digitaria sp. , DIGSS) , which were planted in separate rows within the same pots.
• AMARE redroot pigweed
• DIGSS crabgrass
• Example 19 percent control of two species 8 days after picloram application
• Example 19 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 19, except that the herbicide used was bromacil in the form of the wettable powder formulation sold under the name of Hyvar-X by DuPont.
• Example 20 percent control of two species 8 days after bromacil application
• Example 19 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 19, except that the herbicide used was pendimethalin in the form of the emulsifiable concentrate formulation sold under the name of Prowl by American Cyanamid.
• Example 21 percent control of two species 8 days after pendimethalin application
• Example 22 percent control of two species 8 days after norflurazon application
• Example _22 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was quizalofop racemic mixture as its ethyl ester in the form of the emulsifiable concentrate formulation sold under the name of Assure by DuPont, and the species used were johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense, SORHA) and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi, SETFA) , which were planted in separate rows within the same pots.
• the herbicide used was quizalofop racemic mixture as its ethyl ester in the form of the emulsifiable concentrate formulation sold under the name of Assure by DuPont, and the species used were johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense, SORHA) and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi, SETFA) , which were planted in separate rows within the same pots.
• SORHA johnsongrass
• Setaria faberi Setaria faberi
• Example 23 percent control of two species 8 days after quizalofop application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was flupoxam in the form of a suspension concentrate formulation, and the species used were redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE) and Indian mustard (Brassica juncea, BRSJU) , which were planted in separate rows within the same pots.
• the herbicide used was flupoxam in the form of a suspension concentrate formulation
• the species used were redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE) and Indian mustard (Brassica juncea, BRSJU) , which were planted in separate rows within the same pots.
• AMARE redroot pigweed
• BRSJU Indian mustard
• Example 24 percent control of two species 8 days after flupoxa application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was isoxaben in the form of technical product, and the species used were redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE) and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi, SETFA) , which were planted in separate rows within the same pots.
• the herbicide used was isoxaben in the form of technical product
• the species used were redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus, AMARE) and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi, SETFA) , which were planted in separate rows within the same pots.
• AMARE redroot pigweed
• SETFA giant foxtail
• Example 25 percent control of two species 8 days after isoxaben application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was fosamine as its ammonium salt in the form of technical material.
• Example 26 percent control of two species 7 days after fosamine-ammonium application
• Example 27 percent control of ABUTH 10 days after herbicide application herbicide rate (kg a.e. no rain rain or a.i. /ha) unabraded abraded unabraded abraded no herbicide 0 0 halosulfuron
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was halosulfuron in the form of technical product.
• Example 28 percent control of two species 11 days after halosulfuron application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was chlorsulfuron in the form of technical product.
• Example 29 percent control of two species 11 days after chlorsulfuron application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was chlori uron in the form of technical product.
• Example 30 percent control of two species 11 days after chlorimuron application rate PANMI ABUTH
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was oxyfluorfen in the form of technical product, and the study was conducted only on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) .
• Example 31 percent control of ABUTH 11 days after oxyfluorfen application
• Example 32 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was oxyfluorfen in the form of technical product.
• Example 32 percent control of two species 10 days after oxyfluorfen application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was acifluorfen acid as technical product.
• Example 33 percent control of two species 10 days after acifluorfen application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was fomesafen as its sodium salt in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation Reflex of Zeneca.
• Example 34 percent control of two species 10 days after fomesafen-sodium application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was halosulfuron in the form of technical product, and the only weed species included in the study was velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH).
• Example 35 percent control of ABUTH 16 days after halosulfuron application
• Example 36 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was chlorimuron in the form of technical product, and the only weed species included in the study was velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) .
• Example 36 percent control of ABUTH 16 days after chlorimuron application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was triallate in the form of technical product, and the only weed species included in the study was wild oat (Avena fatua, AVEFA) .
• Example 37 percent control of AVEFA 16 days after triallate application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was bro acil acid in the form of technical product.
• Example 38 percent control of two species 14 days after bromacil application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the -59- invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was bentazon acid in the form of technical product.
• Example 39 percent control of two species 14 days after bentazon application
• Example 15 The procedure in this Example illustrative of the invention was as described for Example 15, except that the herbicide used was atrazine in the form of technical product.
• Example 40 percent control of two species 10 days after atrazine application
• Example 41 percent control of two species 10 days after metribuzin application
• Example 42 In this Example illustrative of the invention, abrasion by means of propelled abrasive particles was tested for enhancement of performance of the gametocide clofencet.
• Wheat cv. Anza plants were grown from seed in pots containing a growing medium of Metromix 350 containing a slow release fertilizer, in a growth chamber with temperature settings of 20 * C day, 18 * C night, a 14 h photoperiod and light intensity of 600 ⁇ Einsteins during the day. Plants were grown for 40 days before treatment. Plants were either unabraded or abraded using a
• abrasion by means of propelled abrasive particles was tested for enhancement of performance of the insecticides methamidophos and methomyl.
• Tobacco cv Samsun plants were grown from seed in 2-inch (5.1 cm) square pots containing Metromix 350. After seedling emergence, seedlings were thinned to 1 plant per pot and maintained in a growth chamber at constant 21'C temperature and 50% relative humidity with a 16 h photoperiod and light intensity of 500 ⁇ Einsteins during the light period. Plants were used for the experimental treatments of this Example at the 5-6 leaf stage, 12 weeks after planting.
• Tobacco budwor (Heliothis virescens) eggs were purchased from USDA-ARS Southern Field Crop Insect
• Diabrotica undecimpuncta howardi Barber (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) , on an artificial diet and corn" , published in 1985 in Journal of Economic Entomology Volume 78, pages 290-293.
• Four cages were clipped on to each tobacco plant 24 hours after insecticide treatment. Two second instar larvae were transferred to each cage using a camel hair brush.
• the clip-on cages were similar to those described by Eenil, A.H. et al. in Euphytica Volume 33, page 825, published in 1984.
• the cages were 1 or 1.5 cm in diameter and were 1 cm deep with one end enclosed with nylon chiffon.
• each cage was attached to opposing arms of a common hair clip so that the cage could be sandwiched on to a leaf.
• Tobacco plants were unabraded, or abraded using a Sears CraftsmanTM hand-held sandblaster according to the method described for Examples 1-9. Two passes of the sandblaster were required to treat all of the plant foliage.
• Insecticide was applied as technical product in water at a spray volume of 20 gallons/acre (187 liters/hectare) containing 0.5% weight/volume Tween 20, using a standard track sprayer. Simulated rain, 0.125 inch (0.32 cm), was applied 15 minutes after insecticide application by multiple passes with an automatic overhead irrigation system.
• Treated tobacco plants were moved to and maintained in a growth chamber with temperature settings of 29.4"C day, 25.6'C night, constant 60% relative humidity and a 12 h photoperiod with light intensity of 562 ⁇ Einsteins. Mortality of larvae was recorded 3 days after treatment and the average of 2 replications of each treatment computed.
• Example 43 percent mortality of tobacco budworm larvae 3 days after insecticide treatment of tobacco plants followed by "rain"
• insecticide rate (kg a.i./ha) unabraded abraded ethamidophos
• abrasion by means of propelled abrasive particles was tested for enhancement of performance of the nematicide oxamyl.
• Tomato (cv. Rutgers) plants were greenhouse grown from seed in 3-inch (7.6 cm) square pots containing a sterile mix of 75% sand and 25% Metromix 200. Greenhouse temperature was maintained at 25"C. Plants received abrasion and oxamyl treatments 3 weeks after planting.
• Tomato plants were unabraded, or abraded using a Sears CraftsmanTM hand-held sandblaster according to the method described for Examples 1-9. Three passes of the sandblaster were required to treat all of the plant foliage.
• oxamyl was applied in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation Vydate of DuPont, diluted as appropriate in water containing 0.5% weight/volume Tween 20, and sprayed to wet using a hand sprayer. Prior to spraying, the soil surface in the pots was covered with fine vermiculite to prevent soil contamination. The vermiculite was dumped off the pots as soon as the spray had dried on the tomato leaves.
• Nematode (Meloidigyne incognita) eggs were harvested from diseased tomato roots 2 days before inoculation. Plants were inoculated 1 day after oxamyl treatment by pipetting 8000 viable eggs on to the soil surface in each pot. Plants then were transferred to a growth chamber at 25"C. Severity of nematode galling was recorded 21 days after inoculation and the average for all replications of each treatment computed. Example 44: percent root galling 21 days after inoculation
• Plants were then assigned to different herbicide treatments in a factorial experimental design with 2 replications. All plants for each herbicide treatment were sprayed at the same time using a track sprayer calibrated to deliver 20 gallons/acre (187 liters/hectare) water with an 8002E nozzle having a 50- mesh screen, 16 inches (41 cm) above the plant canopy.
• the herbicide used was glyphosate as its isopropylamine salt, in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation MON 2139 of Monsanto Company.
• Spray solutions were made from stock solutions prepared by dilution of MON 2139 in water. After 13 days, visual evaluation was performed to estimate herbicidal efficacy as percent control of treated plants compared to untreated check plants. Average percent control was computed for each treatment.
• Example 45 percent control of ABUTH 13 days after glyphosate application
• Example 47 Physical injury in this Example was inflicted on the above-ground portions of the plants, approximately 2 weeks after planting, by various propelled particulate abrasives. This was applied using the same sandblaster as used in Example 47.
• air pressure was maintained at 40 lb/sq inch (276 kiloPascals)
• the nozzle was set 16 inches (41 cm) above the plant canopy
• track speed was under 1 mile/hour (1.6 km/hr) and one pass was made with the sandblaster.
• Two feed rates were used, which in the case of 200-mesh garnet were calculated to give deposition rates of the abrasive equivalent to 143 and 256 lb/acre (160 and 287 kg/ha) .
• Materials used as abrasive agents in this study were: garnet, 200-mesh as used in Example 47 glass cullet, 1040 supplied by Universal glass cullet, 1035 supplied by Universal aluminum oxide type B, 120-mesh white silica sand, 1.0 profile size, supplied by Unimin glass beads, 140-270 mesh Scott' s Lawn & Garden fertilizer granules ground to a fine powder using a Retsch 2M-1 mill Plants were then assigned to different herbicide treatments in a factorial experimental design with 2 replications.
• Example 46 percent control of CHEAL 12 days after glyphosate application
• Example 47 percent control of ABUTH 14 days after glyphosate application
• glyphosate garnet in spray solution rate (kg (g/liter) a.e./ha) 0 0. 5 1. 0 5. 0 nozzle 13 cm above canopy 0 0 3 0
• Example 47 percent control of IPOSS 14 days after glyphosate application
• glyphosate garnet in spray solution rate (kg (g/liter) a.e./ha) 0.5 1.0 5.0 nozzle 13 cm above canopy
• Example 48 percent control of ABUTH 13 days after glyphosate application
• Plants with and without the dry ice treatment were sprayed at the same time using a track sprayer calibrated to deliver 20 gallons/acre (187 liters/ha) water with an 8002E nozzle having a 50-mesh screen, 16 inches (41 cm) above the plant canopy. Each treatment was replicated three times. Similar glyphosate treatments were applied to plants which had not received dry ice. Plants were returned to the greenhouse after spraying.
• Example 49 percent control of ABUTH 5 and 11 days after glyphosate application (DAT)
• Example 50 In this Example illustrative of the invention, velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti, ABUTH) seeds were planted in 4-inch (10.1-cm) square pots filled with a soil mix consisting of 50% Metromix 350 plus 50% silt loam soil to which 100 g/cu ft (3.57 kg/m 3 ) Osmocote fertilizer were added, and the seeds were covered with the same soil mix without added fertilizer. The pots were placed in a greenhouse with sub-irrigation, and emerging seedlings were thinned to 2 plants per pot. Greenhouse temperature settings were 85'F (29 * C) day, 70 * F (21'C) night, with a 14-14.5 h photoperiod. The same settings were maintained before and after treatment.
• Plants were then assigned to different herbicide treatments in a factorial experimental design with 3 replications. All plants for each herbicide treatment were sprayed at the same time using a track sprayer calibrated to deliver 20 gallons/acre (187 liters/ha) water with an 8002E nozzle having a 50-mesh screen, 16 inches (41 cm) above the plant canopy.
• the herbicide used was glyphosate as its isopropylamine salt, in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation MON 2139 of Monsanto Company.
• Spray solutions were made from stock solutions prepared by dilution of MON 2139 in water. After an interval of 11 days, a visual evaluation was performed to estimate herbicidal efficacy as percent control of treated plants compared to untreated check plants. Average percent control was computed for each treatment and is presented in the Table below.
• Example 50 percent control of ABUTH 11 days after glyphosate application
• Example 51 In this Example illustrative of the invention, a field experiment was conducted in the Australian Capital Territory on 5-10 cm high vegetation consisting primarily of white flatweed (Hypochoeris microcephala, HRYMI) at the rosette stage of growth and silvergrass (Vulpia sp. , VLPSS) at the 1-3 tiller stage. Plots were established, 2 m wide and 10 m long, with 3 replications of each treatment.
• HRYMI white flatweed
• Vulpia sp. , VLPSS silvergrass
• Plots received either no physical injury, or one of two injury treatments, a prior art method described herein as "bruising” and a method of the present invention described herein as “blasting” .
• Bruising involved driving a 2 metric ton four-wheel drive vehicle fitted with rubber tires, twice over the plot in opposite directions.
• a hand-held sandblaster was used having a container of capacity 1000 cm 3 slung under the gun body.
• the sandblaster was made of die-cast aluminum alloy and equipped with a 6 mm nozzle.
• the operating pressure was 95 lb/sq inch (655 kPa) .
• the abrasive used was a commercial product consisting of fine glass particles.
• plots received an application of glyphosate as its isopropylamine salt in the form of the aqueous concentrate formulation sold in Australia as Roundup® herbicide, diluted appropriately in water.
• Application was made using a hand-held boom sprayer fitted with 11001 nozzles, operating at 250 kPa pressure and delivering 90 liters/ha spray volume.
• Example 51 percent control of two species 14 days after glyphosate application

Landscapes

• Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
• General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
• Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
• Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
• Wood Science & Technology (AREA)
• Environmental Sciences (AREA)
• Forests & Forestry (AREA)
• Toxicology (AREA)
• Pest Control & Pesticides (AREA)
• Zoology (AREA)
• Biodiversity & Conservation Biology (AREA)
• Ecology (AREA)
• Insects & Arthropods (AREA)
• Botany (AREA)
• Agronomy & Crop Science (AREA)
• Plant Pathology (AREA)
• Dentistry (AREA)
• Agricultural Chemicals And Associated Chemicals (AREA)
• Cosmetics (AREA)
• Breeding Of Plants And Reproduction By Means Of Culturing (AREA)
• Cultivation Of Plants (AREA)
• Medicines Containing Plant Substances (AREA)

Priority Applications (8)

Applications Claiming Priority (4)

Publications (1)

Family

ID=26967999

Family Applications (1)

Country Status (9)

Cited By (41)

Families Citing this family (4)

Citations (9)

• 1995
  • 1995-08-14 DE DE69514924T patent/DE69514924T2/de not_active Expired - Fee Related
  • 1995-08-14 EP EP95930822A patent/EP0776155B1/de not_active Revoked
  • 1995-08-14 JP JP8508163A patent/JPH10506269A/ja active Pending
  • 1995-08-14 NZ NZ292319A patent/NZ292319A/xx unknown
  • 1995-08-14 WO PCT/US1995/010340 patent/WO1996005721A1/en not_active Application Discontinuation
  • 1995-08-14 BR BR9508620A patent/BR9508620A/pt not_active IP Right Cessation
  • 1995-08-14 AU AU34058/95A patent/AU683771B2/en not_active Ceased
  • 1995-08-14 CA CA002196405A patent/CA2196405A1/en not_active Abandoned
  • 1995-08-14 AT AT95930822T patent/ATE189356T1/de not_active IP Right Cessation

Patent Citations (9)

Non-Patent Citations (7)

Also Published As

Similar Documents

Legal Events